 |
 |
I'm enjoying this discussion - but - am perplexed by the suggested need (is curator more important than critic) to attribute hierarchical values to the roles of any cultural producers/commentators. Surely we're all part of the mix? For me it's the variety of voices, perspectives intentions and opinions, along with the resultant tensions, that make it interesting and, indeed, viable. scuse me if i'm reacting out of context, I have to admit to speed reading most days! :-) Hannah *Note new postal address. Please update your records** Hannah Redler Curator, Gallery X Jubilee Arts c/PLEX Project 1a Overend Street West Bromwich, B70 6EY, UK switchboard: ++44 (0) 121 525 6861 direct line: ++44 (0) 121 524 2109 fax: ++44 (0) 121 525 6475 mobile: 0777 99 36 149 The Jubilee Arts c/PLEX Project is the UK's major initiative to harness creativity, community development, the creative industries and economic regeneration. The c/PLEX building has been designed by Stirling Prize winners Alsop Architects (for Peckham Library) and the project has been brought forward by Jubilee Arts, one of the UK's leading community arts companies. It will be built in West Bromwich, Sandwell in the Black Country. www.c-plex.co.uk www.jubilee-zone.co.uk -----Original Message----- From: Mathew Kabatoff [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: 13 February 2002 06:36 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: curating critically In a long forgotten email, I actually sent to Steve approximately 2 years ago, I asked "in a contemporary moement where the modes of production around media based practices that were at times expensive, vying for exhibition space and the establishment of a critical and historically succienct discourse, was there any difference between a 'producer' and a 'curator'" Steve answered (permit this flashback steve) "there doesn't appear to be any difference". Thinking about this conflation in regards to the role of the curator, as well as several assertions by list-members that "curators are in fact more important than critics", it would seem then that the curators role to the production new media art (in this case) is bound to both captial and discursive ecomonies. This could be an interesting intersection in terms of practice as modes of distribution, as the curator is the one constructing an exhibition that is supported by either a local, national or international institution. The curator, and I think that it could really be said to be opportunisitically specific to new media practices, as they involve so much, the purchasing of technologies and the rearticulation of exhibition space in the face of burgening artistic practices, that alternate modes of display, organization and in fact new media art production, can be presented. I am thinking here of a potential role for the curator to move along both horizontal and vertical axis of exhibition, presentation and the development of discourse. Therefore the curator would be able to intervene, or to work with artists at various levels that would significantly contribute to the greater discourse and representation of new media practices. The curator could embody a role that was working with and alongside artists, not meaning that they would produce their work, but almost collaborate in the development of a discourse, the firming of exhibition space and the articulation of discussion on the lecture circuit. The document produced around the show is neither criticism, or art history, but the historical, theorietical and economic conditions that frame the work. It seems that this mode, is what makes the role of the curator different from either the historian or the critic, as their practice is not hermunetically sealed within it own written substrate. But the question is, is that if priviledge this mode of heterogeneous artistic support, is priviledged over strident methods history or criticism, does the discursive space risk entropy, due to the expenditure of energies in some many areas in while producing: the best gallery setting, the best web-site, the best catalogue essay, the best relationship with the artist etc...(i guess that is why you would have a production team). apologies for rambling, but I think that the disussion put forth on the list really has been towards the better articulation of new-media art curation and the discursive set of terms that surround it. opposed to the resistance the steve is providing in terms of 'defining and killing' both the discourse and practice, this forum, amongst others seems to be so much about a certain type of coherence and 'coming together'. mathew > Thought this article was interesting in relation to discussion of curating. > http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/12/arts/design/12CURA.html?todayshea dlines > > > A couple of things that I appreciated about what Enwezor said: > "Mr. Enwezor said he blamed this narrow vision on a kind of inherent timidity > shared by many curators, dealers and collectors. "What really struck me was how > conservative they were, the lack of intellectual curiosity, their fear of > failure or to explore anything before it became a fashion."" > > I keep hearing talk about "it's time" to sum things up; to "really" assess net > art, etc. - which I don't necessarily disagree with and certainly practice at > times, but it also seems like an opportunity to experiment on the curatorial > side of things as well as the art making/culture producing side, and to what > extent does that mean trying to figure something out that interests you, as a > curator, without necessarily knowing the answer or even knowing if how you > approach the matter will be a "success?" > > Enwezor also said: > "For his part, Mr. Enwezor says the duty of a curator is to pay close attention > to the world that gives birth to art, rather than to try to predict its next > trend. "Given the complexity of deep entanglements with which we live, it makes > no sense to predict," he said. "I see the exhibition as more of a diagnosis than > a prognosis."" > > While I probably overstate the case, I think it's worth holding in my the > _possibility_ that defining something is another way of predicting and may not > be always the most useful role. > > s > > > Steve Dietz > Curator New Media > Walker Art Center > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Curating digital art - www.newmedia.sunderland.ac.uk/crumb/ > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Sarah Thompson > > Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 5:12 AM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: curating critically > > > > > > re: Josephine 's questions - > > > >1 - it is beyond doubt that curators are as important or probably more > > >important as critics in the way art is perceived. Can they make a > > >difference as to how it is valuated (economically) as well? > > > > I used to think curators were very much connected to the role of archiving, > > if only in terms of cataloging and contextualising works of art. Is this > > not still the case? Archiving is closely connected to evaluation. This > > museum practice is what happens generally after works have been exhibited > > in galleries or online etc.. > > Now musuems of modern art archive the processes of contemporary > > commissioning, presentation and appreciation of the arts too - 'as they > > happen'.. So the archives are digital. These archives are strange because > > they themselves exist within unstable media. In other words whose going to > > archive the archives. (Ada web has already been archived I suppose). > > Then there's the curating practice of producing exhibitions of works which > > have not yet been evaluated within a market context. These exhibitions are > > often on themes conceived by the curator who perhaps might extend this > > notion to it being a concept similar to that in art practice - more > > personal and specific than usual. This is why so many artists have also > > curated I think. > > > > The economies of these processes are increasingly interlinked. The > > artist/curator might get funding for an exhibition which they can then pass > > on to other artists who they feel they can collaborate with in producing a > > show (for instance). This show might involve a network outside the gallery > > context, which also collaborates with the experience. As such, elements of > > the experience may become archived in a casual kind of way. These informal > > archives might at some point find their way into a museum as evidence of > > the original event. (or diagrams in the gallery) > > As such, what is being funded is a kind of asynchronous distributed > > event/performance which depends on technological continuity to be > > re-enacted. > > There is a relationship here between moving image/performance/event and the > > gallery/museum as a space for the free/paid for consumption of ideas and > > experiences > > > > > > > >2 - There are on line and off line exhibitions. Do curators take more > > >liberties (with both the artists and the artworks) when they arrange an > > >on line exhibition then when they organize physical exhibitions? If yes, > > >why? > > > > The liberties which are taken seem to be related to the very nature of the > > web, the way the web has so far been engineered and the way that this > > architecture affects perceptions of what constitutes the work. In other > > words there is no engineered structure which denotes unequivocally the > > source of the work. It is also all too easy for big institutions to view > > the web as a content pool, for which there is, as yet, no legal structure > > requiring them to pay for use/access. > > > > >3 - When dealing with net art (but also other electronic art and new > > >media art) do curators realize at all there is a history and context? If > > >yes, should they take this context into account at all? Are catalogues > > >giving enough insight into the works presented? > > > > history and context should be used to appreciate the conceptual, aesthetic > > and technical significance of works, but it seems many of the histories > > which relate to net art and other electronic/new media art need to be > > discovered.. > > > > > > >The web and the net > > >are not just a collection of journals and magazines, they have some > > >qualities of tv and radio combined with the personal space of the > > >telephone. The cultural space has changed, and art institutions are part > > >of it. Art institutions and curators should realise what power politics > > >they become/became part of. > > > > New kind of cultural engineering/production process needed too. > > > > :) > > Sarah > > > > ######################################################################## This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared by MailMarshal ######################################################################### This e-mail message is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient please delete the message and notify the sender. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author.